Abstract
In Case C-525/12 the European Court of Justice concludes that cost recovery for water services as outlined in Article 9 of the Water Framework Directive is only one of the instruments for Member States to strive for a rational water use. It furthermore concludes that the WFD environmental objectives not necessarily imply that cost recovery should be applicable to all water-related activities mentioned in Article 2 (38) WFD. In this underlying contribution a number of critical remarks to this judgment are provided. In view of the authors, the European Court of Justice reduces the effectivity of the cost recovery principle too rigorously by reducing the principle of cost recovery for water services to a practically voluntary tool for Member States.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 80-94 |
| Number of pages | 15 |
| Journal | Journal for European Envrionmental & Planning Law |
| Volume | 12 |
| Issue number | 1 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - 19 Mar 2015 |
Keywords
- Article 9 Water Framework Directive
- Cost Recovery
- Economic Instruments
- Polluter Pays Principle
- Water Services
- Water Uses
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'The effectiveness of the principle of recovery of the costs of water services jeopardized by the European Court of Justice - Annotations on the judgment in C-525/12'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Cite this
- APA
- Author
- BIBTEX
- Harvard
- Standard
- RIS
- Vancouver